> Governments have generally not recognized the legitimacy of civil disobedience or viewed political objectives as an excuse for breaking the law. Specifically, the law usually distinguishes between criminal motive and criminal intent; the offender's motives or purposes may be admirable and praiseworthy, but his intent may still be criminal. Hence the saying that "if there is any possible justification of civil disobedience it must come from outside the legal system."
See also the Necessity Defense (the above mentioned "political necessity") [0] and Jury Nullification [1].
> Governments have generally not recognized the legitimacy of civil disobedience or viewed political objectives as an excuse for breaking the law. Specifically, the law usually distinguishes between criminal motive and criminal intent; the offender's motives or purposes may be admirable and praiseworthy, but his intent may still be criminal. Hence the saying that "if there is any possible justification of civil disobedience it must come from outside the legal system."
See also the Necessity Defense (the above mentioned "political necessity") [0] and Jury Nullification [1].
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_(criminal_law)
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_Unit...